• RSS Feed
We want to share the ideas that work.
Check in with us from time to time, see what we are thinking about, and who we are listening to as we search for new and better ways of doing business.

Three Ways Marketers are Still Stuck in “Last Click”

Written By Abe Mezrich Nov. 14

By this point in marketing history, it’s fairly unanimous that “last click” marketing attribution—giving all the credit to the ad that leads immediately to the conversion—is sub-optimal analytics. But while no sophisticated marketer would rely on last click alone, the spirit of last click is, unfortunately, alive and well.

Essentially, last click attribution is just one example of a wider problem. Marketers have a lot of readily-available data about a portion of the purchase funnel—and a lot less data about the other factors that drive consumers to a decision. In last click, that manifests itself in focusing analytics on one touch point, like email or search. But there are many more ways marketers still miss the full array of consumer decision drivers, and end up giving ads more credit—or more blame—than they really deserve.

For a few examples of more sophisticated “last click” problems, read on.

1. Not looking beyond the ad

There are a lot of things that drive consumers to act—or that drive them away—that have nothing to do with marketing. If consumers buy more umbrellas when it rains, less gas when prices are high, or refuse to buy sub-par products, it’s quite possible that advertising had little to do with the decision.

In theory, that’s obvious. But in practice, external impact can be a lot harder to identify than you might think. And so it’s endlessly common for marketing campaigns to get the credit—or the blame—that really ought to go to those external factors. That’s why it’s critical to investigate not just what marketing factors are driving purchase decisions—but what non-marketing factors are driving customer activity, too.

2. Ignoring the halo effect

Say you’re a small sneaker brand running three ad campaigns concurrently. One ad is for your basketball line, one is for your running shoes, and a third is for the parent brand. Your data shows that your running shoe ads perform very well. But should all the credit go to the running shoe ad—or should some go to the other two ads as well?

If you’re active enough in marketing, it’s likely that consumers have seen a lot of your ads. They’ve seen ads for your multiple products. They’ve seen ads for your brand. They may even have associations with your advertising that go all the way back  to childhood. These are powerful influences that will inevitably impact your ad effectiveness. And if you’re not accounting for the  impact these “halo effects” have on your message, you’re potentially misreading the real contribution any given ad is contributing to your bottom line.

3. Ignoring the sequence

It’s not just your multiple campaigns that impact the effectiveness of each ad. The multiple ads within a campaign impact each other. That’s why a consumer who’s seen your ad once might not respond to your message, but might convert after seeing the same message four times.

This means a lot for attribution. When you’re measuring ad effectiveness, you can’t just look at how the single ad unit, or even the single message, performed. You need to understand how the message has followed consumers across their entire customer journey—from channel to channel, and within channels, all the way to the moment of conversion. Otherwise, you end up giving credit to an ad, when in fact the ad may only perform well across a specific sequence. You’re leaving critical information out of the picture.

To be sure, there a lot more ways that “last click” thinking persists. But you get the point: getting attribution right is a cross-channel, holistic task. Anything short is leaving data, and ultimately revenue, on the table.

Want to learn a bit more about the state of attribution today? Check out the latest Forrester report on cross-channel attribution providers. 

Add a comment

Data Setup: Get Beyond the Grunt Work

Written By Anna Dorofiyenko Oct. 30

Want to get beyond data grunt work? Try these steps for data setup. 

With so much information spread out across various workflow software, Excel files, and even scraps of paper, it takes enormous effort to gather all the data, and to normalize it so all the information can work together toward a consistent story. It’s not much of a surprise that the grunt work of “data wrangling” takes up to 80% of all data effort

How do you keep the data wrangling to a minimum? Setting up your data in the right way is key. I’ll offer a few best practices below.

Know what you’re getting
When a retail supplier ships goods to a store, everyone is in agreement on what’s being shipped—so the folks in the store can easily take the items off the truck, and on to the shelves.

Shipping data is no different.  As clients (including internal clients) hand their data over to you, one of the first questions you need to be able to answer is: What data am I receiving right now? The more precisely you can answer that question, the more effectively you’ll avoid ambiguities—so you can simplify data processing down the road.

For this to work, it’s important that both the providing party and the accepting party are in agreement on the data content. This means being as explicit as possible about nuances like how the data was collected (rarely obvious without some kind of meta-data). It also means specifying ambiguous terms—like whether the “dollars” you’re referring to are US or Canadian (you’d be amazed how often people get tripped up on that one).

Repeat it back

At the end of the data acceptance process, you have to feel that you own and understand the content. Which means that part of the acceptance process is articulating assumptions, looking at summaries and trends, comparing data to other data sources. To make data acceptance really work, take the time to articulate back to the provider what you found in the data provided. That makes the data trusted and memorable. It also introduces common terminology and brings people on the same page. And you’d be amazed how much that articulation forces you to conquer data formatting problems up front.

 

Finding the analysis-ready data points

Once you have all the data in hand, your next job is to figure out which data will actually be useful for your analyses—and what might be best to keep aside. You’ll need to strike a subtle balance between storing as much data as possible—and not trying to boil the ocean. To find that balance, ask yourself a few critical questions:

  • What data readily falls into the scope of the project, what clearly falls outside of it—and what lands in between? 
  • What data will provide the best insight? Compare multiple sources for quality, granularity, data collection methodologies and resulting differences in data volume, coverage, and trends over time.  When you see the range of the data you have, you’ll have a better grasp on which data is the most valuable—and which might be a waste of time, given your other options.
  • Where can it fit? Some data can be accepted in whole; other data might still be valuable mashed with other data sources to create a full picture.
  • Where are the hidden gems? A lot of data will contain interesting facts that might look like errors or inconsistencies to an untrained eye. Keep an open, creative perspective that lets you realize where an “unwanted” piece of data might really be valuable—so you can uncover the less-obvious data points that are especially (and unexpectedly) worth keeping.

Beware of over-normalizing

Once you have all your data in hand, you’ll want to normalize and harmonize the data into something consistent and usable to lend itself readily to insights. This is where shape of the data becomes important. But beware of over-normalization. Since normalization requires reducing information to just a few variables (to make apples-to-apples comparisons easier), there’s always the risk of scrubbing the data so well that you rub away the critical nuances. And those nuances can be painstaking to put back in to the mix once you realize you need them. To save time up front, be clear in defining your analytical variables. In other words, keep your data’s “native tongue” intact – if it speaks in terms of marketing spend, revenues, or units in stock, do not translate it into amounts and counts (even if your “inner engineer” is pushing you to common terminologies).

Of course, none of what I’ve described here is exhaustive. And I’ve left out the ways that automation can be an enormous resource—a topic I hope to return to with a follow-up post on data agility. But what I hope I have offered is a catalyst to get you thinking about taking the data wrangling out of the data process—and putting the real analysis back in

Add a comment

The New CMO/CFO Power Couple

Written By Daniel Kehrer Jul. 28

 

As Big Data disruption upends corporate decision-making, it also exposes organizational anachronisms in marketing groups little changed for decades. In response, companies pioneering in advanced analytics are reinventing how marketing organizations operate. Included in these organizational re-thinks are fundamental changes to key executive relationships – especially between CMOs and CFOs; sometimes with help from a Chief Data and/or Analytics role.

As a result, new marketing/finance partnerships are emerging that promise the biggest changes in a generation, sparked by something that never existed before:  The ability to show clearly, convincingly and quantitatively how marketing and advertising activities contribute to revenue and profit.  Analytics has become a Rosetta Stone, creating common language between (in particular) marketing and finance. Connecting marketing and finance through analytics has broken down walls and is creating an entirely new level of visibility into marketing’s impact on financial performance.

In his Harvard Business Review article “How Big Data Brings Marketing and Finance Together”, Wes Nichols, Co-founder and CEO of MarketShare, examines this game-changing trend through the experiences of several MarketShare clients, including MasterCard, Intel and Mattel. Nichols’ article is part of an HBR Insight Center on The New Marketing Organization that examines how the rise of global marketing and digital technologies have profoundly changed what the marketing functions does. It features best-practice companies and leaders who are redesigning marketing for the global, digital age.

“Companies that fail to update their marketing organizations and continue using antiquated measurement solutions are at risk of being left behind,” writes Nichols. “New marketing-finance relationships combined with advanced analytics technology are increasing efficiency and delivering ‘found’ dollars to the bottom line. Short of creating a killer new product or service, there are few ways a big company can move the needle quite so dramatically.”

Download the full HBR article to find out how key companies are gaining a competitive advantage through advanced marketing analytics.

Download Now

 

Add a comment

Marketing Attribution Podcast

Written By Miriam Ravkin Jul. 14

 

What’s Missing From Your Technology Marketing Action Plan?

Attribution is a hot topic among marketers.  But most attribution is ineffective if not outright broken. The consumer journey can be exceedingly complex. How do you accurately assign credit for each ad or marketing effort so you know what’s working, what’s not and how each effort and investment interacts with the others? If you view digital in a silo you are potentially missing important offline and non-media influences – including long-term brand effects for example – that impact consumer purchase decisions.  The key is a holistic “cross channel” approach that combines digital attribution with mix modeling. In this Podcast interview with Crimson Marketing CEO Glenn Gow, Daniel Kehrer, VP of Marketing at MarketShare, discusses this and other marketing analytics and technology topics. 

Listen to the Podcast

 

 

Add a comment